Dear all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for the DT-IPR Meeting on 9 November 2015 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/MLhYAw A copy of the notes and action items may be found below. Kind regards, Brenda Action Items Action item: inquire with ICANN about whether they have liscensed the trademarks, and if so, under what provisions. Action item: Greg to share document that details the different trademark registrations Action Item: Send Doodle for 2 additional calls between Mon, Tues for next two weeks Notes DT-IRP meeting of 9 November 2015 The nearest thing to a "charter" we have is this statement, which appears in the document linked as number 5 below: With regard to implementation of the ICG proposal, the CWG expects that, in co-ordination with the other operational communities, the detailed requirements for such an independent entity will be agreed and specified and that the appropriate independent entity will then be created or selected (and adapted if necessary) such that it can meet the detailed requirements and that this work will take place within the currently contemplated timelines. Notes 9/11 meeting: * Primary purpose of DT is to come up with principles and requirements and eventually recommendations to CWG-Stewardship in relation to IANA IPR (trademark registrations and domain names). * See document circulated by Greg ( <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iUREZlPBiU-oSYxQXiahEbTcH4P3Ov_EReWzmXNH...> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iUREZlPBiU-oSYxQXiahEbTcH4P3Ov_EReWzmXNH...) * 3 US trademark registrations for the word IANA, for the IANA logo and for IANA with the full name. <http://iana.org/> IANA.org domain name, .net and .org versions are also owned by ICANN. Task is to spec a new home for these trademark registrations. * Question 1: what should be the requirements of the trust? Need to meet the requirement of continued operations, stability and security of the IANA functions in the event of separation. Needs to work now as well as at the time of possible separation. DT encouraged to provide input on what the requirements should be of the trust to hold the IANA trademarks and domain names? Trust should be neutral - key principle. Needs to be responsive and responsible to the three communities in some fashion (will need to be detailed at a later stage). Capable to act like a trademark owner, including quality control, police & enforce trademark rights, but both done with not a too strong touch. Needs to have experience in holding trademarks, but also issues as they relate to the Internet. Needs to have necessary funding to carry out these responsibilities: requires access to personnel with experience and outside trademark counsel. * What need to be requirements specifically in relation to separation: Need to have clear guidelines in relation to licensing, procedure in place for the trust to comply with orders from operational communities in case of separation and required transfer of licenses, including enforcement procedure. This could be operationalised through contract and bylaw requirements as well as trust document itself. See also Sidley comments in relation to trust document requirements. * Question 2: Does the DT consider this one of the principles or requirements for the names community (exercise control/oversight over the mark(s))? Should not be the priority or one of the main elements. Main focus should be that trademark is used by the authorised communities in a manner that has been intended. Consider asking ICANN what kind of quality control has been excercised over the years? Quality control needs to be fit for purpose - needs to meet minimum requirements (legal requirements). * Question 3: Yes, all three communities should be included in a solution, just as the ICG proposal has developed. There are some areas of different understandings: for example, the names community considers PTI the IFO, whereas the numbers community considers ICANN the IFO. * What is meant by neutral? Action item: inquire with ICANN about whether they have liscensed the trademarks, and if so, under what provisions. Action item: Greg to share document that details the different trademark registrations Timeline?: ASAP. Goal is to have interrum report by 19 Nov. Then full report (final draft) 2 weeks after that for following CWG meeting of 3 Dec. * Question 4: What information remains to be provided to the Design Team? _ask ICANN did they trademark _confirm list of three domain names _any other legal advice from Sidley? * Question 5: What does the DT propose to be the defining qualities of a neutral/independent trust that will serve in this role? _may want advice from Trust Lawyers _may want to consider how time efficient to set up new entity * Question 6: Does the Design Team confirm that IFO operational control (and transfer) of domain names is one of the principles/requirements for the names community? _question is about whether the DT agrees with the operational control of the <http://iana.org/> iana.org domain name remains with the IFO _Need to go back to proposal and confirm what it says * Question 7: Can the Design Team specify the elements that would define a neutral/independent trust? _flesh out between now and next call _clarify what neutral / independent means AOB: Next call: Action Item: Send Doodle for 2 additional calls between Mon, Tues for next two weeks Meeting adjourned.
